Heads up NH non motorized boat registration proposal

[peakbagger]

The state of NH is proposing a $10 fee per boat to cover F&G deficit. It has come up in the past.

 

[sardog1]

I'd pay it. I used to in Minnesota.

 

[Paradox]

Do you have a link? I am wondering if it is a one time fee. I am wondering if are kayaks still considered a non-entity.

 

[Paradox]

Eagle Tribune article:

http://www.eagletribune.com/newhampshire/x1636707214/N-H-considers-annual-fee-for-canoes-kayaks

 

[Jay H]

Pennsylvania I believe does something similar for non-motorized boats and has been doing that for some time now..

http://www.dcnr.state.pa.us/stateparks/recreation/boating/

Jay

 

[peakbagger]

I am not stressed out by the fee but hope they dont force registration numbers to be affixed to the hull. Having to put numbers on the exterior hull of my cedar strippers would be real ugly.

Maybe I can get the state to finally give a darn about issuing Hull ID numbers which we technically need in order to transport boats across state and national lines. I chased around trying to get one for my boats several years back but the state wouldnt issue any as they werent required to be registered.

 

[Creag Nan Drochaid]

Well, well, well,
Let me play de'il's advocate here. Fish and Game provides the public landings onto ponds larger than 5 acres, IIRC. We all use them from time to time. F&G conducts SAR for persons in distress outdoors, including paddlers. F&G probably has a finger in the pie of boater safety education too. The case is thus made that we paddlers benefit from F&G services, and should therefore expect to have to pay something for it.
OTOH, since we can use only 1 boat at a time, common sense says this scheme should operate the same as the state-issued handicapped tags you hang from the rear-view mirror of whatever car you happen to be using at the time. In other words, one $10 non-motorized watercraft registration per person, who has to have it on them in order for the boat they are using to be covered. F&G would under the statute have the authority to demand to see that card, just the same as they do with hunting and fishing licenses.

 

[peakbagger]

I agree with permit versus a registration but a F&G officer can tag a lot more boats by using binoculars looking for a decal than having to do a face to face.

 

[Paradox]

I agree with permit versus a registration but a F&G officer can tag a lot more boats by using binoculars looking for a decal than having to do a face to face.

But perhaps a F&G officer can go into a parking lot and determine which cars have boat permits attached to the license plates present with a database search and never have to get out the binoculars. Consider the public launch for Squam Lake on Rt 113 in the town of Holderness. You cannot see many of the boats that might be out on the lake from that ramp, but you sure can see a lot of cars parked there. I am in spirit with your initial observation, in that I really do not want a bureaucrat designed NH sticker on one of my cedar strippers. I am willing to pay extra for that.

It would also be a respectful nod to the legally licensed fisherman, who has been supporting the F&G along, if they did not have to register their paddle/oar/sail boats.

 

[Paradox]

There are a number of canoe and kayak races around the state. I wonder how such a fee would impact these events.

 

[ALGonquin Bob]

I don't live in NH, but this comes up occasionally in New York. What those politicians that propose non-motorized registration don't realize is that paddlers tend to have several boats, as opposed to power boaters that usually have only one boat. Having to affix a sticker to the hull is the norm, and I wouldn't want to do that. Nor would I want to have to register all 5 of my canoes & kayaks just to be free to use any of them. Looks like "Live Free or Die" is just words to some politicians.
PA requires boat registration only when using a DEP (state) launch facility. Paddling, or launching elsewhere, remains free, as it should be. To me, requiring registration of non-motorized boats is akin to making pedestrians pay for the privilege of using the streets.

 

[Stan]

"Enhanced revenues", they call it, designed to allow for enhanced spending. Politicians take advantage of the fact that small boaters are a small percentage of voters so they can likely get away with another "tax hike", which it is regardless of the name. Motorless boaters and hikers are prime targets for such revenue raising and every rescue report seems intended to help reinforce that notion.

As much as I enjoy NH, I don't paddle much in NH and would probably avoid the state altogether if I had to go through red tape and extra costs. There are many inviting ponds, lakes and estuaries in New England, not to mention Florida, where paddling affords access to beautiful, wild and remote areas at a cost commensurate with the environmental and social costs created by the activity ... i.e. nil.

 

[peakbagger]

I do some local paddling in NH on occasion but given the remote lakes just up the road in Western Maine (Umbagog, Richardson Parmacheene, Mooselook, Rangeley and Flagstaff, I think I might elect to drive a bit further if the process is anything from real simple.

 

[sardog1]

Fish and Game has developed hundreds of public launching facilities for boats, including some cartop sites, carry-in only sites and sites that prohibit launching of motorboats and/or personal watercraft: Boating in New Hampshire
Among the Department's many duties are enforcement of boating safety regulations that help protect paddlers and others from the high-speed yahoos.

Paying a relatively small fee, even on a per boat basis, to support these activities seems thoroughly appropriate to me.

 

[sardog1]

The Executive Director has something to say on this subject today:

Everyone Benefits from Fish and Game - Let's Work Together on a Funding Solution

By Glenn Normandeau, Executive Director, N.H. Fish and Game Department

It seems like everyone is talking about canoe and kayak decals these days. I am writing in response to the volume of public comment the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department has received recently following news reports about the recommendations of the Commission on Fish and Game Department Sustainability. One of several possible revenue sources it recommended considering was a non-motorized watercraft decal. In fact, no laws have been passed or decisions made yet on that or other ideas for generating future funding.

The Commission is a Legislative body established last year to look at the funding gap between what the Department takes in and the revenue we need to fulfill all of our obligations to the residents and guests of New Hampshire. In spite of significant reductions in personnel over the last three biennial budgets, rising costs are still outpacing revenue. This gap is a serious problem, and time is short. Unless something changes, the Fish and Game Fund will be depleted by the end of this biennium (June 30, 2015). Given our mission of conserving the state's fish, wildlife and marine resources and their habitats, it would be irresponsible for us to sit back and do nothing.

What's at stake are the services people across the state count on the Fish and Game Department to provide, from managing wildlife populations to rescuing hikers, stocking fish and building boat ramps. It takes financial resources for the Fish and Game Department to do its job properly.

The citizens of New Hampshire care deeply about the state's fish and wildlife, land conservation, and access to public waters. Fish and Game is the agency that protects and maintains these valued resources, which not only have significant intrinsic value in their own right, but are a powerful economic engine for New Hampshire. Hunting, fishing and wildlife watching alone contribute approximately $550 million annually to the economy of the state.

As the budget was hammered out for the current biennium, the Legislature recognized the importance of finding new revenue for Fish and Game, and had the foresight to set up the Sustainability Commission. This body is proceeding to look for a solution in a reasonable, responsible manner. Along the way, they will be listening to public concerns.

The commission cares about impacts of various revenue-raising ideas on particular publics. That said, they also recognize that all citizens, as well as the guests that fund our second largest state industry, tourism, benefit from the services provided by Fish and Game, while the majority of the financial burden of operating the Department has been squarely on the shoulders of the state’s sportsmen and women who hunt and fish.

We look forward to the discussion in the coming months, as the Sustainability Commission works with the Fish and Game Department and the public to find new revenues to fill the gap. I intend to strive for an outcome where a means can be found by which the broader public that benefits from Fish and Game’s services contributes to its operation. I honestly believe that most people who enjoy New Hampshire's outdoors and value our quality of life are willing to do their part. Let's focus our energies on finding a solution together. Thank you for your interest and engagement as we go forward. Read the Sustainability Commission's initial report and learn more at http://www.wildnh.com/funding.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

This is bigger than the paddlers. Please continue discussion here:
NH-F-&-G-Press-Release-Commission-to-study-funding-issue

I thought about moving this thread to Q&A New England...

Tim